Every western analysis of Russia's progress says that it is a disaster. We (the US) spent 8 years training the Ukrainians, building up their defenses, and arming them. In the 4 months since the war started, we've put $54 billion ourselves, plus (IIRC) $10+ billion from the EU. That is more than the entire yearly Russian military budget for their whole country.

We're sending 6 billion more each month, and Ukraine says that they need weapons equal to what they had at the start of the war to keep fighting, meaning they've lost (or it has been "lost") everything they had, and Ukraine says they need 9 billion per month (again IIRC) to keep going.

Russia has taken over 20% of the entire country, an area larger than England, and every day when I check LiveUA (a map with data supplied by the Ukrainian military) the Russians continue to gain after their initial push arouny Kyiv and Kharkov failed.

So how can you call this "poor performance of Russia's conventional military?" How much of Ukraine does Russia have to control before this narrative changes?

I'm not being pro-Russia here, I'm just looking at a map and objective reality. Russia keeps advancing against super-hardened targets. Slow, steady progress. That is the reality on the ground.